• Now's your chance win big! Join our community and get entered to win a RTX 2060 GPU, plus more! Join here.

    Pi Cast Episode 3 streams live on Tuesday, August 4th at 2:30 pm ET (7:30 PM BST). Watch live right here!

    Catch Scharon on the Tom's Hardware Show live on Thursday, August 6th at 2:00 pm ET (7:00 PM BST). Click here!

AMD: DirectX Comments Taken Out of Context

Status
Not open for further replies.

Trialsking

Distinguished
Mar 2, 2007
733
0
19,010
6
Then there are developers like Crytek who literally sell hardware because they seemingly develop for technologies in the future, and could actually bypass an API.
Like developing a console port that only supports DX9 in 2011, when Crysis 1 from 3.5 yrs ago had DX10.
 

osxsier

Distinguished
Aug 24, 2009
126
0
18,680
0
ha! So true...hence why I wont be buying Crysis 2. Im no EA fan, but at least the DICE guys are focusing on the PC.

So my hard earned money will be going to Battlefield 3. It looks amazing and with the return of 64 player support, I already put in my pre-order.
 

scook9

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2008
826
0
18,980
0
Crysis 2 was made in DX9 as that is ALL THAT THE CONSOLES CAN HANDLE

They have already said that DX11 will be there for the PC with hardware that can take advantage of DX11 effects
 

nebun

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
2,841
0
20,810
19
stop developing for consoles and then porting to PC....this is where a lot of the developers go wrong....i am sure it's cheaper and easier to do but it's not good for progress
 

K2N hater

Distinguished
Sep 15, 2009
617
0
18,980
0
Microsoft is commited with Xbox, not PC games. See the reason of the flaming on DirectX? Video card makers are doomed and they know it. Their last hope is OpenGL which doesn't seem to get love from game developers.
 

memadmax

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2011
2,492
0
19,960
95
It's no secret that direct access to the GPU is the fastest way to go. DirectX is... in my opinion, For mid to low end graphics/mid/low end games. I believe that DirectX was originally intended to get up starters to develop games, the more games the better, TONS of games(But they are Grade B games). That way Microsoft got more indirect marketing/exposure.
 

jrtolson

Distinguished
May 2, 2006
31
0
18,530
0
that huddy guys is absolutley right, years ago direct x did conform the pc gaming industry to a set standard.. i have never been a fan of direct3d tho as i think opengl is/was a better api.. but in this age.. Direct x is hindering the graphics card makers, for eg many times we have seen nvidia and Ati add features that have never been supported in games as support for them was never in direct 3d, for example ati truform was a tesselation engine developed in the direct x 8 era... as powerful as truform was it was never included in games.. this is the reason i think opengl was/is better because it can allow developers to add support the open source api.. (aka doom 3).. now in direct x 11 finally tesselation is supported but truform is not.. must be so fustrating for developers

we should all format our pc's and purge microsoft bloat forever lol
 

iam2thecrowe

Glorious
Moderator
[citation][nom]nebun[/nom]stop developing for consoles and then porting to PC....this is where a lot of the developers go wrong....i am sure it's cheaper and easier to do but it's not good for progress[/citation]
its great for progress, the devs make more money so that the CAN progress. otherwise if all they released were high end dx11 titles only they would make no money and not be around for long. You obviously have no idea of the cost and time involved in making a game, especially when you overcomplicate the graphics.[citation][nom]jrtolson[/nom]we should all format our pc's and purge microsoft bloat forever lol[/citation]
and move to apple bloat? or mainstram ubuntu linux bloat. anything that is easy to use and is compatable with numerous hardware configs is going to be bloat unfortunately.
 

Djhg2000

Distinguished
May 16, 2009
165
0
18,680
0
Why can't MS just drop DirectX 9 already?

Because of it we're stuck on trying to optimize an obsolete architecture instead of focusing on the new DirectX 1x series API which in many cases (there are exceptions, as demonstrated by Dirt 2) are way more efficient compared to the older API.

What do we really want, faster DirectX 9 games or a more mature and feature rich DirectX 12?
 

eddieroolz

Splendid
Moderator
Huddy does have a point. Microsoft is caught between their work on the PC platform and their cash cow of Xbox360. Now with Kinect, the Xbox and DirectX9 looks to live on for another 3-4 years...
 

Trialsking

Distinguished
Mar 2, 2007
733
0
19,010
6
[citation][nom]iam2thecrowe[/nom]its great for progress, the devs make more money so that the CAN progress. otherwise if all they released were high end dx11 titles only they would make no money and not be around for long. You obviously have no idea of the cost and time involved in making a game, especially when you overcomplicate the graphics.[/citation]

Progress when we have games that are only DX9 and its 2011?!? You call dumbing down EVERY title to consoles progress?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Ray Trace is the game technology of the future:
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/quake-wars-gets-ray-traced/
Well, maybe sometime in the next decade.
 

marraco

Distinguished
Jan 6, 2007
671
0
18,990
1
Direct access to GPU, close to metal, allows consoles to match Windows on Crysis 2.

Windows is burdened by layers and layers of APIs. Windows GPU have more than 10X the power of best consoles, so the burden of API means that we only enjoy 0.10X of the power of PC GPUs...

But going closer to metal on PC will solve nothing. A developer may spend 2 years creating an amazing game for a given architecture, but after a GPU upgrade, the game stops working, because GPU can't evolution without architecture changes. That's what API do; API translate standard code to different architecture codes. Without API, there is no compatibility, no PC, no evolution.
 

fayzaan

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2010
250
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]osxsier[/nom]ha! So true...hence why I wont be buying Crysis 2. Im no EA fan, but at least the DICE guys are focusing on the PC. So my hard earned money will be going to Battlefield 3. It looks amazing and with the return of 64 player support, I already put in my pre-order.[/citation]

I will destroy you in the battlefield 3 okie dokies??
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
0
[citation][nom]marraco[/nom]Direct access to GPU, close to metal, allows consoles to match Windows on Crysis 2.Windows is burdened by layers and layers of APIs. Windows GPU have more than 10X the power of best consoles, so the burden of API means that we only enjoy 0.10X of the power of PC GPUs...But going closer to metal on PC will solve nothing. A developer may spend 2 years creating an amazing game for a given architecture, but after a GPU upgrade, the game stops working, because GPU can't evolution without architecture changes. That's what API do; API translate standard code to different architecture codes. Without API, there is no compatibility, no PC, no evolution.[/citation]

You're confusing the API with the device driver.

An API does simplify development, because it removes even the device driver from the equation, and allows one to write for NVIDIA, Intel and AMD all at once, but with overhead.

Also, you're incorrect about the compatibility. It assumes they change the instruction set, or more to the point, have it so existing instructions do not run. You can change an architecture without making old instructions not work. Look at the 386, and look at Sandy Bridge. And that's from 1986. If they're not doing it already, they'd have no trouble making a stable instruction set with what they know now, and keeping it for every generation without much, if any, sacrifice. They may be doing it already.
 
G

Guest

Guest
iam2thecrowes said: or mainstram ubuntu linux bloat.

Really? Ubuntu, bloated??? If memory serves, a fresh Ubuntu install is something like 2GB of disk space, and it includes office, torrent, email, cd/dvd burning, etc... software... Fire up Ubuntu Software Center and install a handful of IDEs, a slew of games, and some other random stuff, you may be looking at a 10 to 20gb install.

Whereas Windows 7 installs to something like 20gb, immediately bloats itself to 30gb with shady background HDD activity, and doesn't really come with anything useful. Chuck in Microsoft Bloated Office, Microsoft Bloated Visual Studio, and a few other bloated M$ productivity items, and you're looking at 40 to 60GB.
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
[citation][nom]Trialsking[/nom]Like developing a console port that only supports DX9 in 2011, when Crysis 1 from 3.5 yrs ago had DX10.[/citation]

And Crysis 1 still challenges todays hardware.

As for coding directly to hardware, if I remember correctly Intels Larrabee was supposed to allow that while also developing for DirectX and OpenGL still.
 

annymmo

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2009
347
0
18,780
0
Dudes this so called bloat of installation on hard disk does NOT matter.

It's the instruction PATH all the way down that determines the speed.
The hard drive memory cells don't slow down the process and have nothing to do with it on a hardware level.

The reason there is talk about slower because of space is because of RAM fragmentation+defragmentation+other stuff going on.

We need optimized drivers for pc, it's that simple.
Maybe precompilation or compilation of gpu-code when starting application by drivers just as done by regular C would mean serious catch-up to the consoles.

Or something that does an if/case with instruction sets/hardware and lets you use higher-level or assembler would make it possible to make programs that:
1) Can fallback to an api when necessary
2) Can provide close to metal optimized code in a flexible way.

Something like this would make it possible to let the game developers choose very freely what they want to do.
Don't want to use special gpu-assembly code to do stuff. Fine.
Want to provide gpu-assembly code. Fine! And what the heck we can even throw in api-fallback when the gpu-assembly code doesn't work.

Tada!!! Everybody happy and hopefully cross-pollination!!
 

annymmo

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2009
347
0
18,780
0
Then there are developers like Crytek who literally sell hardware because they seemingly develop for technologies in the future, and could actually bypass an API.
What the frack?!?

Since when does Crytak have a majority share of graphics cards on the desktop platform?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS